Archives for June 2016

Sexual education is being implemented in schools across Canada, the US, UK, New Zeeland and Australia. At one point it will become a global reality: children as young as 5 years old will all be introduced to “the pleasures of sex.” If that sounds strange, it’s because that is strange.

What those new sex curricula do is encourage children and teens to have sex without telling the whole story. They raise kids’ curiosity and awareness to sexual possibilities but leave out important facts concerning physical and psychological health.

That’s really disturbing. Even more disturbing are certain people behind the curricula. I’ll get to that in a moment.

Many communities of outraged parents are protesting the sex ed curricula. Brushed off, they’re accused of ignorance. To sort out once and for all this matter, a group of concerned parents in Canada asked Dr. Miriam Grossman to revise the Toronto sex ed curriculum. Grossman is a renowned child and adolescence psychiatrist with many years of work at the UCLA campus, and what she finds in the curriculum doesn’t sound good: health here is not the priority.

“The priority,” Grossman tells the parents, “is to mold your child’s thinking and attitudes so that they respect, affirm and are comfortable with all sexual choices and lifestyles.” The Toronto curriculum, like so many produced by the sex ed industry, is based on a specific agenda. By centering on political correctness, it completely ignores truths of current science, as well as biological, cultural and individual differences between people. “There is a significant flaw with this approach: it’s not based on reality,” says Grossman.

Basically, children are left to decide what’s best for them in terms of how, when, dos and don’ts of sex. Really? Are children that well-informed and mature to know what’s best for them? Grade 6 students, for example, are instructed to consider their comfort level, personal and family values, and the limits and comfort of others when making any decision regarding a relationship. Grossman questions how a 6-grader could possibly know any of that when even adults struggle with those things.

For Grade 7 students, this is what the curriculum delivers: “Be clear in your own mind about what you are comfortable or uncomfortable with. Being able to talk about this with a partner is an important part of sexual health. Having sex can be an enjoyable experience and can be an important part of a close relationship when you are older.” Grossman questions how a Grade-7 student can possibly know what when you are older means.

They may think that at Grade 8 they will be older. The curriculum is vague and leaves the immature child to decide when they are ready, after discussing it with their equally immature partner. That doesn’t make any sense. Then, at Grade 8, students are taught that there are many options available for sex. Again, it’s up to the child to decide about their choices instead of giving the teacher authority to clarify important things.

The teen brain is different

Teens act on impulse and emotions because their brains are not fully developed: the portion that plays a critical role in decision-making, problem-solving and understanding the consequences of actions won’t be fully mature until the person is into their 20s. This neuroscience needs to be brought into sex education so teachers and parents, and also teenagers and children, understand it and know not to even get close to a situation that they will later regret.

This information doesn’t get into sex education, though, because it doesn’t jive with the ideology that people are all the same, sexual beings from cradle to grave that should act on their sexual urges at any time. The curriculum then ignores current knowledge about child and adolescent development, sexually transmitted diseases, neuropsychology and many other areas, since current science undermines that ideology.

Students are offered a menu with various forms of sexual expression, presented in the curriculum as if all forms are the same and pose the same risks. The curriculum omits that young girls, having an immature cervix, are much more prone to vaginal infections than adult women; that condoms do not offer total protection against infections and sexually transmitted diseases, including AIDS; and that anal sex presents much higher risks of contracting STDs—in the case of HIV, from a very conservative estimate, the risk is at least 31% higher in anal sex than in vaginal intercourse, according to the Health Department of New York City.

Grossman does not advice anal sex to young kids: “It’s too dangerous. Don’t do it.” She mentions a student who got HIV the first time she had anal sex—it can happen. Until 2014, the FDA website used to have a warning for anal sex: “Condoms provide some protection but anal intercourse is simply too dangerous to practice.—C. Everett Koop, General Surgeon.“ Now the warning has been removed. Did biology change? asks Grossman. No. What changed is the culture and the pressure to push for the sex ed agenda. As a result, this information becomes unavailable to the people who need it the most, such as young gay men.

In addition, the curriculum fails to mention that women are much more vulnerable to STDs than men. The Centers for Disease Control in the US informs that “Sexually transmitted diseases pose severe threats to women’s health and fertility … biological factors place women at greater risk than men.” Grossman adds: “The ignorance and lack of biological correct information due to the sex ed industry has lead the US to a situation in which a young person between the ages of 13 and 24 gets an STD every 3.5 seconds.” In Canada, STD rates are also going up.

“This is a crusade to change society, to desensitize children and indoctrinate them,” concludes Grossman in her lecture. What Grossman says is crucial, as it relates to many preventable health problems that are not properly addressed in the curricula and may be a matter of life or death. Not to mention psychological immaturity for sex, which can cause confusion and depression.

One last thing you should know: one of the creators of the curriculum in question, former deputy education minister Benjamin Levin, is in jail for sexual crimes against children, including the possession and distribution of child pornography of the worst kind. You can read the details in TheToronto Life.

8-year olds learn lesson 1: “Let’s have sex”

If you want to check out the controversy about the sex ed curriculum in American schools, here’s a video. At 36:00, its final segment brings a creepy presentation by the US National Sexuality Administration. Using a puppet, it teaches 8-year olds about gender identity, abortion, birth control and sexual intercourse (“It’s when a penis is inserted into a vagina, a mouth or an anus”). This is Lesson 1, entitled “Let’s have sex.” Please note that this is not a title: it’s a command.

What I also perceive in this scenario is that encouraging girls to have sex prematurely means throwing them unguarded into a culture that treats sexually active boys like studs and sexually active girls like sluts. I can’t stress enough how the double standards are still prevalent in our society, especially among teenagers too young to know better. The occurrence of bullying against fragile girls and their resulting stigmatization is a serious issue. Some of them get so depressed they commit suicide.

The defenders of the sex ed curricula argue it’s necessary for children’s safety. Is it really? Dr. Grossman destroys this argument with a very simple instruction: explain to kids that they have private parts, those covered by their bathing suit, and if an adult tries to see or touch them, kids should run, scream and tell their parents. That’s it. No need to be dwelling in anatomically correct names and anal sex.

The same approach is adopted by Lynnette Smith, a sex educator interviewed in the 2014 BBC documentary Porn: What’s the Harm? In her case, she teaches children about pornography. It has nothing to do with what’s proposed by the sex ed curricula, yet she also teaches 5-year olds. Another difference is that she talks to parents first, whereas the sex ed curricula is applied without parents being informed when. You can see Smith’s educational approach at 50:00 into Porn: What’s the Harm? The way she talks to the children is really inspiring.

I would add some questions to the mix. How about regulating the media so it will stop bombarding children with sexual content and encouraging precocious sexuality? How about regulating the multibillion-dollar porn industry so it stops distributing material that glorifies violence, misogyny and pedophilia? How about finding effective ways of stopping revenge porn and the rape culture in universities? Amid all the hypersexualization that occurs, children are being robbed of their childhood and pre-teens have to carry an extra emotional burden for being exposed to sex when they are not ready.

The sex ed curricula not only fails to educate children about porn, but it also fails to prepare young girls for the potential hazards of an active sexual life in a world of double moral standards. Boys have their masculinity defined by how many girls they can score as opposed to cultivating sexual integrity. Girls are conditioned to dress and act like sluts in order to fit in, but they aren’t supposed to be sluts. Slut is a stereotype, though. If something dresses and acts like a slut, then it must be a slut. It’s a conundrum. Sociologist Gail Dines explains that, when a girl is labeled a slut, she experiences the same trauma symptoms as a rape victim because that’s the equivalent of raping her own identity.

Say a girl likes a guy and he asks for an intimate picture of her. She obliges because nudity is everywhere as a norm, and she thinks that’s expected from her in order to please the boy. The photo leaks on the internet, as the boy wants/needs to brag his conquest, or maybe he’s a resentful ex-boyfriend. The girl then will be called a slut and will be bullied relentlessly. She’s a victim. In countries like England and the United States, however, to add insult to injury, the law will label her as a sex offender for sending out “child pornography.” Now how hideous and hypocritical is that?

That’s how institutions go. A poor girl victimized by a leaked photo is victimized again by the legal system while it is OK for the porn industry to distribute videos suggesting incest with pre-teens that any child can access. It’s the typical situation where petty infractions are punished (not in this case, though, since the girl is innocent) and huge crimes committed by big fish are not addressed because big fish have money.

Sexual education should not be left in the hands of institutions, as every institution has an agenda. Parents know what’s best for their children. Each child is different, and what those curricula do is treat children as if they were all the same, ignoring the specific background, personal stage of development and needs of each child.

On my next post I want to take a look at the hookup culture. Yeah, party, alcohol and sex, right? There’s interesting stuff ahead, stay tuned!

Anal sex is everywhere in porn and now it’s taking the romance genre by assault. If you have an erotic romance story, you bet the hero at one point will ask the heroine for anal sex—that is, if he doesn’t force her into it. It’s usually a male’s decision that the girl accepts in the name of love and lust. The hero guarantees she’s going to like it. Countless heroes have done so: let’s train your ass, you’ll love it, yada-yada-yada—then a kiss on her forehead and a dick shoved up her butt.

Wait a minute.

How can he be so sure she’ll love it? And how can he make that decision for her?

It’s not his body.

Anal sex is a male fantasy. It gives the man a sense of empowerment over the woman: he reigns in a dominant position, which is heightened by the idea of transgression: he is entering a forbidden territory. As for women, they have been trained by male porn to find it a desirable practice, since porn is the major sex reference in our society. Anal sex seems to be turning mandatory in erotic romance as it already is in male porn. That really bugs me.

Anal sex is not mandatory: it’s optional.

We are all being brainwashed to believe that everyone should do it, that this is what we want and enjoy. The mass media convinces us through endless repetition that we need this phone, we need those jeans, and now we need anal sex. That’s the anal dictatorship in which we live nowadays.

If you remember from an earlier post, the staple anal sex in porn stemmed out of men’s resentment against women. I would say that’s definitely not the best approach to sexuality. Let’s recall pornographer Paul Hesky’s pearls of wisdom: “Essentially, it comes from every man who’s unhappily married, and he looks at his wife who just nagged at him about this or that or whatnot, and he says, ‘I’d like to fuck you in the ass.’ He’s angry at her, right? And he can’t, so he would rather watch some girl taking it up the ass and fantasize … and that is the attraction, because when people watch anal, nobody wants to watch a girl enjoying anal.”

Now this is what male sex educator Michael Castleman has to say about anal sex: “In porn, ‘anal’ usually means penis-anus intercourse. In real life, this is the least popular form of anal play. Most real anal play involves gentle sphincter massage or shallow fingering. Women who do anal scenes use gobs of lubricant and wear butt plugs for an hour before going on-camera, but viewers never see this. Worse, some porn includes penises that go directly from the woman’s anus into her mouth, which may transmit infection.” Castleman wrote that in an article back in 2012. Today, anal sex has become more common in the real world, thanks to the indoctrination pushed by mainstream porn and now by mainstream erotic romance novels.

The vagina is designed for penetration. Of course, that doesn’t mean you should do extreme stretching or pounding because tears will certainly occur. Nor should you have unprotected vaginal sex, as the risks of getting AIDS and other STDs still exist.

Here is the anus:

— A very fragile ONE-cell thick lining, hardly any protection

— No elasticity

— No natural lubrication

— Higher pH

— Tissue prone to microtears that make it vulnerable to infections and STDs

— Abundant M cells that capture and deliver viruses into the body system

— At least 31% higher risk of HIV and other STDs, in a conservative view

In addition, keep in mind that the use of condoms DOES NOT offer 100% protection against STDs. In an interview, a former prostitute turned sex advisor in Brazil told she used to have anal sex with her clients only once every three days precisely because she was aware of the risks and wanted to protect her body—she was a divorcee in the sex business to support her daughter.

Besides posing much higher risks when it comes to sexually transmitted diseases, anal sex can cause hemorrhoids if not done properly. In extreme cases such as the violent pounding and even double anal penetration endured by pornstars, rectal prolapse may occur: the anus falls out of the body and needs to be stitched back through surgery.

No one mentions those things in porn videos and erotic novels.

That being said, yes, anal sex can be satisfying if done the right way, with lots of foreplay and lube, and avoiding unnecessary risks. The anus has many nerve endings that can enhance pleasure. Anal sex thus may be great or interesting or uncomfortable or very painfully. That will depend on the woman, her mental state and anatomy, as every woman is different. For a man it’s quite easy: it’s his fantasy and his butt is not on the line.

My two cents

That doesn’t mean a fantasy of male domination is necessarily unhealthy. In fact, it can be a turn on for both male and female when performed with complicity and respect (respect, by the way, doesn’t need to be vanilla). In such scenario, like anything else, it can deepen a couple’s intimacy and emotional connection. Anal sex usually has the woman on all fours and the man behind her. It’s animalistic—that’s how animals mate—and for that reason can be very hot. You want the excitement without the pain in the butt? That is achieved by simply adopting the doggie-style position while using the front entrance. Anal or not, the doggie position can make the male parts rub on the right female parts as well as deliver that wild edge.

But let’s go back to our primary anal subject.

As I mentioned on my post about romance heroines, anal sex and any other sexual experiments should be discussed and performed with spontaneous and mutual consent. If one of the partners suggests an idea, a conversation should follow, no matter how brief. That’s when both partners agree to do whatever is being suggested. If one of them feels uneasy and is not in agreement, then that practice can’t happen. It’s as simple as that. And there’s more: consent can be withdrawn anytime if discomfort arises. “Yes” is not set in stone.

What I constantly find in porn film is men sodomizing women without consulting them. It’s a given that those objectified women are there solely to please men: they don’t have wishes, preferences or opinions. Then there’s always the director shouting orders for them to moan how much they’re enjoying it. In romance, it’s not very different. The hero decides what he wants to do with her butt, she goes along with it despite being reluctant and then she ends up loving it. I’m not sure if that’s even realistic.

Furthermore, the staple position for anal sex tends to be the woman on her knees or piled up over the man while he pounds into her. Both positions, in porn, are aimed at displaying the penetration and the woman’s genitalia for the camera. And, in both cases, the woman has little control over the man’s movements. In order for that to happen, the man should lay on his back and the woman should kneel astride him so to be able to rise and lower her hips, controlling the penetration in a way that’s comfortable for her.

Those were my two cents of advice on this subject. I won’t be giving anal sex tips because there are plenty of articles about it out there, should anyone decide to try it.

Take care of yourself, respect your own wishes and be happy. Ignore what popular culture tells you. Popular culture is an interpretation of reality: it’s not reality per se.

On my next post I’ll be talking about sex education in schools. Interestingly enough, we’ll have another brush with anal sex. Yep, it’s all over the place. Stay tuned!